Originally Posted by
tiger1964
But reading about a bit, some IGH's have the 1:1 gear in 1st (lowest) gear, some have 1:1 in a much higher gear.
Fun fact: neither the Shimano Nexus 7 nor the Alfine 11 IGHs have a true 1:1, direct drive gear ratio. They both simulate 1:1 by two-stage compounding down and back up!
Do I understand correctly that friction losses on IGH's are on the 1:1 gear, and losses increase in others?
Theoretically, yes. In actual practice, yeah, but I think it's not that big a deal (others disagree).
Fun fact: the efficiencies vary among derailleur gear ratios, but nobody ever worries about it.
There have been posters who had the ratios and compounding explained to them about a particular IGH, then went and rode the bike and by golly! they could feel the various inefficiencies in the gears just the way it had been explained to them! Except...the ratios and compounding were explained wrong and what they were 'feeling' was all in their mind.
The Sturmey-Archer 8 is designed for the rider to be in the most efficient ratios when riding uphill/with a load/against the wind. A design compromise, yes, but certainly not a horrible one.
So I was thinking set up the gearing with my "flat and level" gear at 1:1, leaving 1 or 2 gears higher, and the others reserved as climbing gears. Is there a fundamental flaw in that plan?
That's the traditional, time-tested IGH set-up for the last 119 years. With a three-speed hub, Sheldon suggested setting the top gear for level riding and leaving two below for climbs/wind.
Say, willing to respace the rear OLD on that '74 Falcon?